Clinton opens up double-digit lead over Trump nationwide

a reply to: Nikola014

That wasn't my post by the way.

a reply to: atomish

And the issue with the judge in his fraud trial? He says Mexicans can't be unbiased in their work. He says the guys heritage is preventing him from acting fairly. A federal judge.
Then of course we know that he gives himself advice because he has a good brain. He said so. 😙

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: atomish

And the issue with the judge in his fraud trial? He says Mexicans can't be unbiased in their work. He says the guys heritage is preventing him from acting fairly. A federal judge.
Then of course we know that he gives himself advice because he has a good brain. He said so. 😙

Meh, I think he's just a posturing, bloviating wind-bag. I bet in any other scenario, he'd have a beer with the Latin judge and not even think twice about his ethnicity.

His ethnicity became an issue when Trump felt he could make a political point (in this case, I'm assuming about conflict of interest) even if the point isn't necessarily a good one.

And of course, I would never question the bigliest brain on the stage!

We agree he sucks, I think. Just for different reasons.

a reply to: BIGPoJo

Who's "science"? Polls are manipulated to satisfy the entity ordering up and paying for the poll. Polls are pretty much useless except to drive an agenda.

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: atomish
A truly accurate one yes. But in modern math , who cares about accuracy , right ?
Now , if that is for one city that the 1400 were polled , the way would be say , this is a poll on how the people in Akron Ohio feel. That makes it a much larger percentage than saying this is how voters feel . That would encompass the entire nation of all subgroups.

That is where all the media polls take you. Not so much accurate .

You have a point but to just poll a city is pretty dumb too because as You get away from the city the people always tend to be conservative.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll has been pretty accurate to actual results in past elections so this one should be paid attention to.


Just look at results from elections compared to what various polls claimed they would be. For Example, the Rasmussen poll had Romney winning by a landslide and that is why most people are not paying attention to theirs this election it is obvious they had a flawed system.

originally posted by: BIGPoJo

originally posted by: abe froman
It's a poll of 1,400 people.

it means absolutely nothing and it's reliability is zero.

Out of 146,000,000 registered voters this is roughly .001%.

Statistics tho. Is it a scientific poll or unscientific? That is the million dollar question. Absolutely nothing has happened that would account for that kind of swing, I find it suspect...

Bingo.

They want to create the narrative that Clinton went on the offensive against Trump and suddenly sky rocketed in the polls. Nope. These things happened 1 day apart. Too little time to collect new data with substance that would show the influence of what she said on the actual attitudes of voters (which is probably a fraction of a percent) so I'm calling BS on this.

a reply to: atomish

We agree he sucks for the same reasons. He has no business running for president. He's turning the whole thing into a media circus.
Sometimes I wonder if he's doing this on purpose otherwise wow bazaar behavior for someone who says he wants to be president.